Indian Nugget

New Delhi: Three friends, 2
villages and a 3 acre plot, the potential harmless ingredients have
cooked up the bloodiest gang war of Delhi, one which has killed over 60
people in the last 25 years.
It all started in the
early 1990s when a three acre plot in Najafgarh's Mitraon village was
sold off. Three friends, Anup and Balraj of Mitraon village and Kishan
Pehelwan of Dichaon Kalan turned bitter rivals and started a gang war
which is still going on in rural Delhi, which shares its border with
Haryana.
The murder of Bharat
Singh alias Bharte, a former MLA and brother of Kishan Pehelwan is seen
as a continuation of that same cycle of violence that has been going on
in Najafgarh since that property dispute which gave rise to two deadly
gangs.
Going back to the
history, Kishan Pehelwan early in his game got close to the
top INLD leadership and cashed in heavily on the prohibition which came
into effect in Haryana between 1996 and 98. The core of his fortune was
built in these two years by bootlegging alcohol into the dry state of
Haryana. While the state is alleged to have lost somewhere
around Rs 1,200 crore during that period, there is no estimate of the
money made by Kishan's gang.
Flushed
with cash, Kishan Pehelwan's gang began eliminating the rivals. Balraj,
the leader of the rival gang from Mitraon village was shot dead in
1998, forcing Anup to reluctantly take up the leadership. But the blood
sport continued. After initial hitch, Anup started killing Kishan's men.
He fled to Australia in 2003-04 only to return and get arrested by the
special cell of Delhi Police for the second time. First arrested in
1998, Kishan was arrested once again when he returned to India. Around
2003, Anup's henchmen took a number of attempts at killing Kishan. He
was bumped off in a daring attack in broad daylight while he was being
brought to a Rohtak court.
After
most of the members of the Anup-Balraj gang were neutralised, Kishan
started delving into politics and became a councilor. His brother Bharat
Singh alias Bharte became an MLA on INLD ticket in 2008. But sources
say Bharte's real rise was in the land grabbing industry. Over the last
two decades, property prices in Delhi have sky-rocketed. Bharat took
full advantage of the boom and went on acquiring disputed properties. He
did not stop at that, he even created dispute where there was none.
Such was his writ in the area that a crime branch officer claims, no
property could change hands without his blessings.
But
around this time a number of other gangs were mushrooming in the
lawless outskirts of Delhi. Vicky from Jharodakalan, Sandeep mental,
Vikas Lagarpuria have all been trying to challenge the Kishan-Bharat
gang. And all of them had a bone to pick with the older dispension. In
fact Udaiveer alias Kaale's father and grand father was allegedly killed
at the behest of Kishan Pehelwan. Vikas Lagarpuria had a running tiff
with Bharte and some allege that he had even slapped Bharat Singh on one
occasion. Vikky and Udaiveer had allegedly attempted to bump
off Bharte in 2012. The immediate provocation was allegedly a plot of
land owned by Vikky's kin which was captured by Bharte.
Bharat,
then a sitting MLA, was in his office when he was shot at. He took 2
bullets in his shoulder and abdomen yet luckily he survived. But he lost
the elections, and with a stable government in Delhi, his focus was
back at the other day job. His rivals, young and old realized that he
could now be in a revenge mode. Ten days back he had another property
dispute with Vikas Lagarpuria. Bharte was trying to fence a plot behind
the Sai Temple in Najafgarh, when Vikas sent fifty to sixty boys, to try
and prevent him.
Police
suspect it could be any of these gangs who could be behind this shoot
out. A buzz going on in the underworld circuit
is Udaiveer alias Kaale had paid a ransom of Rs 3 crore to contract
killers to finish him off. The crime branch, special cell and the local
police are in hot pursuit for a breakthrough in the case. Police fear if
immediate action isn't taken then this can spiral into another round of
blood bath, something that the police can just not afford now.
But
is the fresh, hot blood of the area willing to listen? For these new
mushrooming gangs, this is a golden opportunity. As a senior officer,
active in curbing the organized crime in the city, summed it up 'nothing
grows under the shadow of the Banyan tree. A Banyan tree has just been
cut down'.

MUMBAI: The ban on beef infringes on a citizen's fundamental rights,says a PIL filed on Tuesday in the Bombay high court, asserting thatthe right to eat the meat of one's choice is integral to it.

***In his public interest litigation, activist Ketan Tirodkar calledthe recent changes in the Maharashtra Animal Preservation (Amendment)Act, 1995, which provides for punishment for possessing or sellingbeef, "atrocious". Consumption and sale of beef should not becriminalized. "Right to eat should not be affected," he added.***[Emphasis added.]

President Pranab Mukherjee last month gave his assent to theamendments in the Act. The slaughter of cows was already banned in thestate; now bulls and bullocks have been added to the list. Anyoneselling beef or found in possession of it can be jailed for up to fiveyears and fined Rs 10,000.

READ ALSO: HC: Don't make beef ban a religious issue

Lawyers consume beef on HC campus to protest Maharashtra ban

Why Kerala has no beef with beef

Tirodkar's petition says the ban is an infringement on Article 21(right to life), which he claims includes "the right to eat meat ofone's choice". "The question is whether the State can impose such aninfringement on the fundamental right by virtue of an enactment," heasked. The activist has urged the court to strike down the portion ofthe law which makes it an offence to possess or sell beef.

***He said slaughter can be banned in the state, but there should beno restriction on beef being brought in from neighbouring states likeGoa or from abroad for consumption. "Judicial activism is absolutelynecessary to strike down such a portion of an enactment that surpassesthe parameters laid down by Article 21 of the Constitution of India,"he said. The matter will come up for hearing in due course.***[Emphasis added.]

MUMBAI: Tuesday saw a couple of protests in the city against theBJP-Sena government's alleged anti-minority policies. Oppositionlegislators like Naseem Khan, Amin Patel, Waris Pathan and JitendraAwhad burnt a copy of the March 2 resolution quashing 5% reservationto Muslims in jobs and education, and daily wagers at Deonar abattoirand workers of beef shops demanded lifting of the ban on beef trade.

***Hundreds gathered at Azad Maidan and raised slogans against theBJP-Shiv Sena government over enforcement of the Maharashtra AnimalPreservation (Amendment) Act, 1995. Since the Act extends the ban onslaughter of cows to bulls and bullock, work at the state-run Deonarabattoir has drastically reduced, rendering thousands jobless***[emphasis added]. "We have inherited this job from our forefathers andwe don't know any other skill. The government has struck at ourlivelihood," said Deepak Bhalerao, leader of Sarva Shramik Sangh, anorganization of workers at the Deonar abattoir.

"Our families are starving. Where will we get food from? Did theFadnavis government think about its impact before it brought the newlaw?" said Shakil Qureishi, another leader. Arif Qureishi, a beefmerchant at Crawford market, said around 80 workers at beef shops atCrawford Market have been jobless since March 3.

Questioning if this is how Narendra Modi's slogan 'sabka saath, sabkavikas' was being implemented, activists threatened hunger strike."Instead of starving at home, we will die during hunger strike if thelaw is not amended. ***Cow slaughter has been banned and nobodyopposes it but by adding bulls and bullock to the list, the governmenthas hit the poor*** [emphasis added]," said activist FirozMithiborewala.

Can the dietary practices, the animal which is worshipped as a mother by section of population, be brought in on the political arena? While all this sounds surreal, its true as far as the role of cow is there in Indian political firmament. Recently Maharashtra Government got the Presidents assent to the bill “Maharashtra Animal Preservation (Amendment) Bill 1995 which will now ban the slaughter of bulls and bullocks as well. The defaulters will face a prison term of five years and a fine of Rs. 10000. When I first read ‘Animal Preservation’ part of the title of the bill, I thought this is some bill related to all the animals which are used for human consumption or deals with the use of animals for different purposes by the society. Contrary to that it turned out that this applies only to Cow and its progeny. A decade ago I was shocked to read that one of the outstanding scholars of ancient Indian History Professor Dwijendra Nath Jha received regular threats on phone telling him not to publish his book, ‘Holy Cow Beef in Indian Dietary tradition’. This scholarly work traces the place of beef in Indian diet from centuries.

The idea is to target the minorities for beef eating, and cow slaughter. One recalls that one of the slogans which rent the air in the run up the 2014 General elections was"Modi ko matdan, gai ko jeevadan [Vote for Modi, give life to the cow], BJP ka sandesh, bachegi gai, bachega desh [BJP’s message, the cow will be saved, the country will be saved]". Thisslogan was propped up ‘Cow Development Cell’ of BJP.

As such emotive-identity issues are the hall mark of the politics in the name of religion. BJP built itself up on another identity issue, that of Ram Temple. The cow has always been accompanying and a parallel issue for political mobilization by RSS-BJP. It has also been the point of triggering violence in many cases all through. With the formation of VHP by RSS in 1964, cow issue has been systematically propped up time and over again. Many a misconceptions about cow, beef eating have been constructed. Building of misconceptions has also been extended to the dietary habits of the ‘Muslim’ community in particular. The profession of section of Muslims, Kasai (butcher), those in the trade of beef selling has been brought in to the ‘Hate other’, ‘social common sense’ in particular. The result being that it is perceived at broad layers of society as if beef eating is compulsory for Muslims. The notion which has been popularized is that Cow is Holy for Hindus: Muslims kill her! The perception is that the Muslim invaders brought beef eating into India. These misconceptions are by now the part of ‘social common sense’ of the large number of people in the society.

All the components of this are myths and stereotypes have been constructed over a period of time. Time and over again one hears about some small communal violence, killing of dalits and traders of cows leading to communal polarization. Many a dalits dealing with cow hide have been killed in places like Gohana in Hariyana and the VHP leaders had justified such acts.

Contrary to this the beef eating and sacrifice of cows was prevalent here from Vedic period. The sacrifice of cows in the Yagnas (ritual around fire) is extensively mentioned in the scriptures. There is mention about beef eating in various books. There is a phrase in Taitreya Brahmin which states ‘Atho Annam Via Gau’ (Cow is in veritably food) Different gods are mentioned to be having their choices for particular type of cow flesh. Prof D. N. Jha quotes innumerable examples of this in his masterpiece.

The preaching of non violence in India came with the rise of agricultural society. Jainism called for total non violence, while Buddhism talked non-violence; preventing of wasteful animal sacrifice in particular. It was much later that Brahmanism picked up cow as a symbol for Brahmanism in response and as a reaction to non-violence of these religions. Since Brahmanism has asserted itself to betheHinduism it projects as if Cow is holy for Hindus overall. The matter of fact is that many sections of society, more particularly Dalits and Tribal have been eating beef all through. It is another matter that lately with the rising assertion of Hindutva, many a communities which are dependent on beef as a rich and cheap source of protein are gradually being forced to either give it up or do a rethink on that.

In contrast to what is being asserted by BJP and company, Swami Vivekanand had a different take on the issue. He points out speaking to a large gathering in USA said: “You will be astonished if I tell you that, according to old ceremonials, he is not a good Hindu who does not eat beef. On certain occasions he must sacrifice a bull and eat it.”

This is corroborated by other research works sponsored by the Ramakrishna Mission established by Swami Vivekananda himself. One of these reads: “The Vedic Aryans, including the Brahmanas, ate fish, meat and even beef. A distinguished guest was honoured with beef served at a meal. Although the Vedic Aryans ate beef, milch cows were not killed. One of the words that designated cow was aghnya (what shall not be killed). But a guest was a goghna (one for whom a cow is killed). It is only bulls, barren cows and calves that were killed.”[C. Kunhan Raja, ‘Vedic Culture’, cited in the series, Suniti Kumar Chatterji and others (eds.), The Cultural Heritage of India, Vol 1 (Calcutta: The Ramakrishna Mission, 1993), 217.]

In response to this bill thousands of workers of Devnar abattoir (Mumbai), who will be losing their jobs came on the streets to protest against this move of the government (March 11). Many traders, from different religion also came to Azad Maidan in Mumbai to protest this communal act of the Maharashtra Government. In a PIL filed in the Bombay High Court the petitioner argues that this ban on beef infringes on the fundamental right of citizens to choose meat of their choice is fundamental. The hope is that the society overcomes such abuse of ‘identity issues’ for political goals and lets the people have their own choices in matters of food habits, and let those who are making their living from this trade do so peacefully.

Story highlights

Police spokesman says interview is banned because of its potential to create disorder

Convicted rapist blames victim, says he had right to teach her a lesson

New Delhi, India (CNN)An Indian court has banned the publication of an interview with a convicted rapist, who blamed his victim and said she "should just be silent and allow the rape."

The woman, who was attacked by five men on a public bus in 2012, later died from her injuries. The attack provoked outrage around the world.

A spokesman for the New Delhi police told CNN the interview was banned because of its potential to breed disorder.

"A police case has been registered, and we have obtained restrain(ing) orders from the magistrate against the interview," Rajan Bhagat said Tuesday. "No channel beaming into India, local or foreign, can air it. It cannot be published either."

Mukesh Singh, a bus driver, was one of the five men convicted in the gang rape case and sentenced to death by hanging. He and three others are appealing the sentence. Singh showed no remorse, for what he dubbed "an accident" that occurred on December 2012 toa BBC Storyville documentary crew.

"A decent girl won't roam around at 9 o'clock at night," he told the BBC. "A girl is far more responsible for rape than a boy. Boy and girl are not equal.

"Housework and housekeeping is for girls, not roaming in discos and bars at night doing wrong things, wearing wrong clothes."

India gang rape: Four sentenced to death02:12

PLAY VIDEO

He suggested that they "had a right to teach them a lesson."

The father of the girl, known as Nirbhaya, told CNN he had read Singh's comments.

"He has challenged society and the judicial system. The death sentences handed down in this case should be carried out without delay and the appeals dismissed," said Badrinath Singh.

Meanwhile, a defense lawyer in the case distanced himself from Singh's comments, calling them hurtful.

"He shouldn't have given this interview," said defense attorney A.P. Singh. "There was no need for him to speak like that from the jail. His comments have further hurt public sentiments," Singh said.

A senior Indian supreme court lawyer not related to the 2012 rape trial said the convict's remarks would further strengthen the prosecution's demands for dismissal of his appeal. "He showed no remorse or repentance," said advocate Dharitry Phookan. "Personally, I think the man just made the case of death sentence against him much stronger," she added.

Bus driver's comments

On December 16, 2012, the 23-year-old female victim had gone to watch "The Life of Pi" with a male friend at a New Delhi mall and boarded the bus.

Mukesh Singh was the driver, and the men on the bus dragged the woman to the back and took turns raping the woman, using an iron rod to violate her as the bus drove around the city for almost an hour. They also beat her male friend.

When they had finished, they dumped the two victims by the side of the road.

The brutality of the attack galvanized the nation, triggering mass demonstrations and cast a spotlight on the treatment of women in India.

Singh seemed puzzled about why the gang rape became such a touchstone issue, wrote Leslee Udwin, director of the documentary.

The woman's injuries were so severe that some internal organs had to be removed. She died two weeks later at a Singapore hospital.

"When being raped, she shouldn't fight back," Singh told the BBC, saying she should've permitted the assault. "Then they'd have dropped her off after 'doing her.' "

'Her life was of no value'

Singh said the death sentence as a punishment for rape will only endanger more women.

"Now when they rape, they won't leave the girl like we did. They will kill her. Before, they would rape and say, 'Leave her, she won't tell anyone.' Now when they rape, especially the criminal types, they will just kill the girl," Singh said.

The rape that shocked the world02:39

PLAY VIDEO

Jail authorities told CNN that Singh's interview was conducted in 2013, but it's unclear whether it was filmed before or after the convictions. Under Indian law, no media interview in custody is admissible in law. But it remains unclear how Singh's comments may affect his appeals process.

Singh's brother, Ram Singh, was one of the six men charged with rape and murder, but he was found hanged in his jail cell inDelhi before the trial ended in March 2013.

Singh's lawyer echoed similar sentiments about women: "If my daughter or sister engaged in premarital activities and disgraced herself ... I would most certainly take this sort of sister or daughter to my farmhouse, and in front of my entire family, I would put petrol on her and set her alight."

The documentary filmmakers also interviewed other convicted rapists, one called Guarav, who admitted he had raped a 5-year-old girl and retold his story with a half-smile.

When she asked how he could commit such an act given how small and terrified she was, he gave her a look as if she was "crazy for even asking the question."

He replied, "She was beggar girl. Her life was of no value."

Uprising

Despite the challenges facing women in India, Udwin acknowledges the efforts and the masses of both men and women who are demanding change in India's gender dynamics and equality for women.

"Their courage and determination to be heard was extraordinarily inspiring," she writes.

According to a BBC spokesperson, the documentary "provides a revealing insight into a horrific crime that sent shock waves around the world and led to protests across India demanding changes in attitudes towards women.

"The film handles the issue responsibly and we are confident the programme fully complies with our editorial guidelines."